Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

worthypatterns.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 44 posts

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#11

Post by woadwarrior01 »

mping wrote: post #9

Can someone explain to me the basic tenets of Hinduism, and if it is related to Yoga? I have met so many yoga teachers that don't know how to answer this yet are free to speak about spiritual yoga stuff, so I remain confused.

There is no single set of basic tenets. There's a continuum of schools of philosophy within the umbrella term of Hinduism, ranging from materialist atheistic (Ajivika, Charvaka) to pantheistic with a non-sentient God (Advaita) to full blown theism (Dvaita and Vishistadwaita). You get to pick your poison.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#12

Post by danans »

pulkitsh1234 wrote: post #3

Well written, I am on my personal journey to discover what being a Hindu means. I am appalled by the fact that the true knowledge and the diversity of different schools and line of thoughts has been dissolved and sublimated into a crude understanding of what Hinduism means. I have thought about it a lot, and I think the main reason is that there is no single doctrine / school that everyone agreed upon in the past. I…

> And I was proved entirely wrong when I started reading The Upanishads, which are part of the Vedic literature.

Their being classified a part of the "Vedic" literature is not borne out by linguistic analysis, even though tradition claims it to be.

They post-date the actual Vedas themselves by centuries. The language used in most of them does not contain nearly as much irregularity as the Vedic language nor its pitch accent system - it's on its way to being a refined liturgical language, not a common man's language as the Vedic language was.

And the subject matter contained in them reflect that of the elites of a far more settled and stratified society (vs the more nomadic tribal culture of the Vedas). They are no more representative of Hinduism than their contemporary folk traditions, just as St. Augustine is no more representative of Catholicism than folk Catholicism where blessings are sought for mundane topics like health and prosperity.

No doubt, both groups of literature are incredible, but to lump them into one is incorrect, even if that is the tradition.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#13

Post by naravara »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #8
naravara wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, that's always a given when you look at a culture from outside. It takes time to uncover the details and the diversity. In this particular case, everyone is looking from "outside." Contemporary Hindus' own understandings of the religion are largely filtered through the modernist interpretations of reformers in the 19th and 20th centuries. They're somewhat divorced from the classical bardic and collegiate tradi…

> the modernist interpretations of reformers in the 19th and 20th centuries E.g. Brahmo Samaj, that sort of thing? What other reformers you have in mind? I'm curious where would you put Aurobindo in this context. He's definitely "modernist", but he stuck to the Vedas quite a lot.

Even people like Ramakrishna and Vivekananda had a lot of Theosophist influences. And much of the English translated works from people like Radhakrishnan were notable for speaking to Western audiences too. Then there is the whole VHP take on things which is a purely modernist (nationalism) prism.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#14

Post by pulkitsh1234 »

danans wrote: post #12
pulkitsh1234 wrote: post #3

Well written, I am on my personal journey to discover what being a Hindu means. I am appalled by the fact that the true knowledge and the diversity of different schools and line of thoughts has been dissolved and sublimated into a crude understanding of what Hinduism means. I have thought about it a lot, and I think the main reason is that there is no single doctrine / school that everyone agreed upon in the past. I…

> And I was proved entirely wrong when I started reading The Upanishads, which are part of the Vedic literature. Their being classified a part of the "Vedic" literature is not borne out by linguistic analysis, even though tradition claims it to be. They post-date the actual Vedas themselves by centuries. The language used in most of them does not contain nearly as much irregularity as the Vedic language nor its pitch…

Can you provide some sources for your information ? From what I have read they are considered to be that part of the Vedas.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#15

Post by Florin_Andrei »

naravara wrote: post #13
Florin_Andrei wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the modernist interpretations of reformers in the 19th and 20th centuries E.g. Brahmo Samaj, that sort of thing? What other reformers you have in mind? I'm curious where would you put Aurobindo in this context. He's definitely "modernist", but he stuck to the Vedas quite a lot.

Even people like Ramakrishna and Vivekananda had a lot of Theosophist influences. And much of the English translated works from people like Radhakrishnan were notable for speaking to Western audiences too. Then there is the whole VHP take on things which is a purely modernist (nationalism) prism.

Ramakrishna is surprising to me. He literally grew up in a small village. Are you saying he was influenced later?

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#16

Post by danans »

pulkitsh1234 wrote: post #14
danans wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I was proved entirely wrong when I started reading The Upanishads, which are part of the Vedic literature. Their being classified a part of the "Vedic" literature is not borne out by linguistic analysis, even though tradition claims it to be. They post-date the actual Vedas themselves by centuries. The language used in most of them does not contain nearly as much irregularity as the Vedic language nor its pitch…

Can you provide some sources for your information ? From what I have read they are considered to be that part of the Vedas.

Here's an article that gets into the differences between the Vedic hymns and the later material that grew around them (in section 2):

https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/vedol

In particular:

”Over time a body of dependent and scholastic material grew up around the poems, known loosely as 'the Veda'. Perhaps around 1000 BC (all dating in prehistoric India is only approximate), editors gathered the ancient poems together and arranged them, together with some more modern material, into ten books according to rules that were largely artificial"

In terms of subject matter, I would cite the texts themselves. The bulk of the original Vedas (meaning the Samhitas proper), though exquisite in language, poetry and description, are remarkably concrete and earthly compared to the subject matter of the Upanishads, which instead are concerned with esoteric subjects like dualism and non-dualism, and the relationship of that to individual identity and a universal consciousness. The Vedic Samhita's subject matter predominantly concerns propitiation of deified forces of nature to aid with everyday survival concerns, like food, kinship practices, and inter-tribal conflicts.

The Upanishads clearly represent the reflections of an elite of a far more "advanced" stage of society than the Samhitas.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#17

Post by mping »

woadwarrior01 wrote: post #11
mping wrote: post #9

Can someone explain to me the basic tenets of Hinduism, and if it is related to Yoga? I have met so many yoga teachers that don't know how to answer this yet are free to speak about spiritual yoga stuff, so I remain confused.

There is no single set of basic tenets. There's a continuum of schools of philosophy within the umbrella term of Hinduism, ranging from materialist atheistic (Ajivika, Charvaka) to pantheistic with a non-sentient God (Advaita) to full blown theism (Dvaita and Vishistadwaita). You get to pick your poison.

That clears it up, thanks.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#18

Post by ravoori »

danans wrote: post #16
pulkitsh1234 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you provide some sources for your information ? From what I have read they are considered to be that part of the Vedas.

Here's an article that gets into the differences between the Vedic hymns and the later material that grew around them (in section 2): https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/vedol In particular: ”Over time a body of dependent and scholastic material grew up around the poems, known loosely as 'the Veda'. Perhaps around 1000 BC (all dating in prehistoric India is only approximate), editors gathered the ancient poems together a…

Indeed. Many Upanishads are, in spirit, opposed to the old Vedas, and some are outright critical of the ritualism that forms the core of the Vedas.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#19

Post by jelliclesfarm »

ravoori wrote: post #18
danans wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's an article that gets into the differences between the Vedic hymns and the later material that grew around them (in section 2): https://lrc.la.utexas.edu/eieol/vedol In particular: ”Over time a body of dependent and scholastic material grew up around the poems, known loosely as 'the Veda'. Perhaps around 1000 BC (all dating in prehistoric India is only approximate), editors gathered the ancient poems together a…

Indeed. Many Upanishads are, in spirit, opposed to the old Vedas, and some are outright critical of the ritualism that forms the core of the Vedas.

No, they are not. Upanishads are the later chapters of the Vedas. There are four vedas and ten principal upanishads.

Hindu philosophy aims to be accessible and useful to everyone. In that, Upanishads offer a way for people who are unable to follow Vedic standards.

An alternative is not opposition. It’s available choice. Upanishads are not against the Vedas. They just form the latter portions of Vedas.

Eg: consider chicken eaters. Veganism is an alternative dietary choice. Veganism existed before it was considered an ‘opposition’ to consuming meat. They are all part of ‘food’ and ‘eating’. Some vegans decided that it’s position against meat eating, but that’s not it’s origin. It’s a choice And a latter interpretation that it’s opposed to meat eating. But it doesn’t mean that veganism emerged due to an opposition to meat eating to compete with it.

Re: Soul Meets Body: An initial examination of the Samkhya school

#20

Post by naravara »

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #15
naravara wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even people like Ramakrishna and Vivekananda had a lot of Theosophist influences. And much of the English translated works from people like Radhakrishnan were notable for speaking to Western audiences too. Then there is the whole VHP take on things which is a purely modernist (nationalism) prism.

Ramakrishna is surprising to me. He literally grew up in a small village. Are you saying he was influenced later?

It's probably more accurate to ascribe it to his movement than Ramakrishna himself, but everyone would have been influenced by it. The "infrastructure" of philosophical discourse and spreading of ideas had largely atrophied away from neglect before the British even arrived in India. The big centers of learning, like Nalanda or Takshasila, had been burned out long ago.

The traveling orders of priests were greatly diminished and didn't hold the kind of intellectual or cultural sway among people in power that they used to. In Adi Shankaracharya's time they would travel around the country giving lectures and being feted by village heads and kings as they hosted big debates and symposiums. But once the background education system was gone, much of the continued development and education depended on the beneficence of sympathetic Muslim rulers.

Post reply on HN